This copy is for your personal non-commercial use only. To order presentation-ready copies of Toronto Star content for distribution to colleagues, clients or customers, or inquire about permissions/licensing, please go to: www.TorontoStarReprints.com

Two recent incidents of racism in North America have caught my attention: the anti-Sikh flyers calling for “mainstream Canadians” being only Caucasian, and the Los Angelas Clippers owner Donald Sterling expressing that he doesn’t want black people to come to his games.

It shocks me that such mindsets can prevail even today in 2014. Underneath the skin we are all the same flesh and bone. I’m sure that the vast majority of Canadian youth like myself agree that racism is a destructive ideology.

Article Continued Below

No human should feel subpar or second-class simply due to the colour of his or her skin.

Tayyab Pirzada, Mississauga

If Premier Kathleen Wynne really wants to build an inclusive province, she ought to start by building a truly inclusive school system. A OneSchoolSystem.org supporter in the Brampton area told me once that when walking into one of the area’s truly public schools, one could be forgiven for forgetting they are in Canada. It is not that there are no white children in those schools, but that the white children are often disproportionately concentrated in the area’s Catholic schools.

Canada’s 2001 Census — the last mandatory long form census with credible religion data — illustrated that you cannot divide children by religion without simultaneously dividing them by race and ethnic group. Of the dozen or so visible minorities tracked in the census, only two — Latin Americans and Filipinos — are more likely to be Catholic than non-Catholic (both are overwhelmingly Catholic). All of the other visible minorities are more likely to be non-Catholic — and therefore concentrated in Ontario’s truly public schools.

If Wynne really wants to end the “politics of division” in Ontario, she should start by ending the religious division in our school system, which is invariably accompanied by racial and ethnic division as well. Let’s build a school system where school populations accurately reflect the diversity of their communities – a school system where children of all faiths “learn, play, laugh, and sing together,” as Dalton McGuinty wrongly suggested that they do in a 2007 Ontario Liberal election ad.

If she can’t do that, could she please stop the self-serving act as “Champion of Inclusiveness” on the eve of an expected provincial election? She has not yet shown herself deserving of the title.

In Rwanda, Syria and Canada, social divisiveness along ethnic lines has been caused by European elites blatantly favouring minority ethnic groups over the majority. In Central Africa, French colonists favoured Tutsis over the Hutus because they thought that Tutsis had lighter skin and were thus racially superior.

In the Middle East, French colonists favoured Alawite Muslims over the majority of other Muslims because they thought the Alawites would make better colonial soldiers.

In Canada, white politicians have for decades used promises of favouritism with immigration policies to buy votes from the largest visible minority ethnic groups. But the same politicians haven’t behaved in the same way with the majority of Canadians who are of European descent.

And if anyone calls attention to this double-standardism along colour lines, they are denounced as intolerant racists. How has this served the cause of racial harmony in Canada?

Canada desperately needs a new consensus called the Common Good.

Our national political parties must exist equally for all Canadians, by birth or by choice, of every colour, creed, ethnicity and gender orientation. They must tailor immigration policies towards the desires of all ethnic or racial groups in this country or none, but never just a favoured three or four.

They must ensure that immigration policies are responsive to economic conditions, such as unemployment rates. And they must have the fiscal and moral responsibility to compensate provincial governments for the billions in additional health care and other social services costs resulting from decades of “the most generous immigration policies in the world.”

Cathy Schaffter, Toronto

Just this past March 21st, across Canada, there has been the formal commemoration of the United Nations Internationl Day for the Elimination of Discrimination. When I was privileged to be a senior analyst in the federal Multiculturalism Canada, I assisted the government to formally launch this commemorative day to address racism across the country.

One clear acton component was to generate public education to greater consciousness of enhancing sound race relations in our diverse society, especially with “visible minorities.”

One major initiative in which I was leadership involved was to change the RCMP dress code to include Sikh Canadians with turbans in the RCMP. This indeed was an achievement that was confirmed by the Supreme Court. Decades have gone by and the Sikh Canadians have their due equal and full participation place in Canadian society.

Now, we hear of an ant-immigration group distributing flyers in Brampton that voice an anti-immigration agenda and that photo displays on the flyer only the members of the Sikh community. This Sikh target propagation against immigrants by this lobby group has racist overtones. This is not what Canada is all about with its unique Canadian Multiculturalism Act and the national exposure to the annual March 21st day towards racial harmony.

This racial discrimination action by the Brampton anti-immigration group must be checked by general public condemnation and by government intervention. In such an instance, we must get back to the Canadian way where all are respected, irrespective of their cultural, racial and religious origins.

Roman Mukerjee, Ottawa

If we see closely the photo printed in your report, it seems to suggest that while there was mixed population in Brampton previously, now it is predominantly inhabited by the Sikhs. Since Canada is home to people from all parts of the world belonging to various religions, races, colour, etc, it has got to have mixed population everywhere.

No particular community has to be allowed to be in majority anywhere. Otherwise, special vested interests are created which become an unfair bargaining power and may not be in the best interests of Canada and world peace.

Deepak Narain, Toronto

As a Chinese Canadian who grew up in Scarborough, there is nothing more heart-breaking for a boy than to hear his friends say that their families are moving away because their parents feel that there are too many Chinese people in the neighbourhood.

The anti-immigration pamphlet in Brampton shows the picture of whites at the top and the picture of Sikhs at the bottom. Then it gave figures of the changing ethnic make-up of Brampton: basically the number whites are dropping. And this somehow is the south Asians’ fault.

Brampton was originally a mostly white neighbourhood. The reason for the change in demographics is because white people moved out to avoid the immigrants. Nobody commandeered their houses.

I invite your readers to research the phenomenon of “white fight” on the Internet and elsewhere.

Steve Wong, North York

The only people in Canada who should be protesting about immigration are aboriginal Canadians. As a European who immigrated here 20 odd years ago, I consider all Canadians with the obvious exception of the aboriginals, as immigrants.

Why doesn’t Immigration Watch Canada’s Dan Murray have the guts to say that only white people should be allowed to move here? C’mon Dan show the people your true colours.

Susan Sodhi, Mississauga

Under this immigration law, anyone can be a terrorist, April 28

If I were an immigrant – even one with Canadian citizenship – I would live in fear of arbitrary deportation. No matter how minimal my political involvement in my homeland, I would keep my mouth shut about anything remotely connected to Canadian or international politics. And I would support the Conservatives in surveys and on election day, for fear that they would be able to find out whether I favoured another party.

Thanks to generations of Canadian-born ancestry, I cannot be deported, so I feel I must speak out – at least until Harper and Co. figure out how to silence and disenfranchise people like me as well.

The Ministry of Citizenship and Immigration’s treatment of Oscar Vigil and José Figueroa, and others like them, is despicable. The Harperites say they value the family and favour reunification, but then tear families apart, abusing the intent of a poorly worded law to do so.

On behalf of all Canadians who are as appalled by the Harper government’s behaviour as I am, I apologize to Oscar Vigil, José Figueroa, their families, and any other people in their situation.

Once again, Harper and Co. have made me ashamed of my country.

Patricia Collins, Toronto

Thanks to the Star for publishing the exposé on the impact of Canada’s definition of “terrorism” on highly-regarded immigrants.

The heart of the problem lies with the self-serving definition of “terrorism,” which excludes all state violence but includes violence to attain self-determination. A UN attempt to define terrorism exempting freedom fighters was rejected by the United States, so there is no internationally agreed-upon legal definition.

The traditional definition of “terrorism” (as shown by various international legal cases) excluded freedom fighters, which exempted heroes such as Nelson Mandela, the French resistance in World War II, and the American Revolutionaries. It would also exempt various organizations regarded by the West today as “terrorist,” which could be illegal to even name under our “anti-terrorism” laws.

Karin Brothers, Toronto

Oscar Vigil and Jose Figueroa are under threat of deportation because they assisted an armed militia in El Salvador that was seeking to overthrow the vicious and tyrannical regime that was governing their country. In the context of the then government’s use of death squads to eliminate all civilian opposition, this was a very heroic thing to do.

If they are heroes why are they being treated as villains? Does this tell us something about the view of governmental officialdom as regards the regime these men were seeking to overthrow, or is it more a case of legalistic fundamentalism? Either way this kind of extreme judgment and disruption of peoples lives discredits Canada.

More from the Toronto Star & Partners

LOADING

Copyright owned or licensed by Toronto Star Newspapers Limited. All rights reserved. Republication or distribution of this content is expressly prohibited without the prior written consent of Toronto Star Newspapers Limited and/or its licensors. To order copies of Toronto Star articles, please go to: www.TorontoStarReprints.com